[ RadSafe ] medical scans and risk

[Stabin, Michael]

Read the material again. Zanzonico said nothing for or against the LNT as a model. What he is saying is that even if you accept the very conservative assumption of LNT, the number of REAL HUMAN BEINGS who will die, if not given the necessary medical attention because of their fear of small amounts of radiaiton, DWARFS the number of THEORETICAL deaths predicted by LNT. I agree with the idea that we can reduce the number of CTs given in routine medical care, and I agreed with Brenner et al. in 2001 that exposures could be reduced in pediatric CTs while giving the same quality of medical care. Scaring the whole country out of its wits with alarmist articles, appearances on morning news shows and the like talking about hundreds of thousands of people dying of cancer, however, is simply an irresponsible and unprofessional way to achieve this goal. For MONTHS after the first Brenner article, we had people at Vanderbilt and elsewhere refusing to let their children have CTs that were needed for their medical care. Now for a time we will have many people avoiding CT scans that may be needed to diagnose cancer, watch the progression and recurrence of cancer, and monitor other diseases. Will any cancer deaths be avoided because of the lower collective radiation exposures? No one knows. Will real morbidity and mortality occur because of a lack of necessary medical attention? Almost certainly.
 
 
Mike
 
Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
Associate Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University
1161 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37232-2675
Phone (615) 343-0068
Fax   (615) 322-3764
e-mail     michael.g.stabin at vanderbilt.edu
internet   www.doseinfo-radar.com


Message: 5
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 02:27:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: parthasarathy k s <ksparth at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] medical scans and risk
To: "Brennan, Mike  \(DOH\)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>,
        radsafe at radlab.nl
Message-ID: <478110.43793.qm at web23114.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Friends,

HPS should have waited till  Dr. Zanzonico's model -calculations and  related arguments have been published in a peer- reviewed journal. There is no overwhelming evidence which supports any model other than LNT though the prescription of this model started as a convenient tool in radiological protection. The issue is unlikely to be settled soon.

Regards
K.S.Parthasarathy